Itxaso del Palacio (Notion Capital): The founder health paradox

A product can solve a real problem and still fail to make it through enterprise procurement.Greg Lawton, CEO at Nodes & Links, joins Andreas Munk Holm to explain why technical founders selling into large, risk-sensitive organisations need more than product-market fit. Greg argues that they also need company commercial fit: the processes, security, compliance and operational maturity required for a customer to actually buy from them. Drawing on his experience selling into defence and building Nodes & Links, Greg explains why complex enterprise sales is often about clearing milestones long before revenue starts to scale. That means understanding how decisions are really made across users, management, budget holders, IT, security and procurement. The conversation also explores why procurement friction can become a competitive moat, how to hire for relationship-led sales, why legitimacy matters more than lead volume and how Nodes & Links built auditable AI for environments where hallucinations are unacceptable.HighlightsWhy product-market fit is not enough for complex enterprise salesWhat company commercial fit means in practiceWhy procurement milestones can matter more than early revenueHow multiple stakeholders shape the enterprise buying processWhy procurement barriers can reduce competitionWhat Greg looks for in enterprise sales hiresWhy legitimacy matters more than a huge top of funnelHow Nodes & Links approaches AI where outputs need to be provably reliable-------We’re pleased to be partnering with Luxembourg Venture Days on October 14–15 at Luxexpo The Box. Explore the agenda and register here: venture-days.lu-------Timestamps(00:00) Intro(02:45) Why product-market fit is only the first hurdle(05:00) Why enterprise sales is a milestone game, not a revenue game(06:20) What Nodes & Links does and why its AI must be auditable(09:40) Selling AI where hallucinations are unacceptable(12:10) How enterprise procurement really works(16:00) Why barriers to entry become barriers to competition(17:30) What selling to the Navy taught Greg about complex sales(20:10) Hiring for relationship-led enterprise sales(23:45) Why legitimacy matters more than lead volume(28:15) How the AI boom changed the sales conversation(32:50) Why pilot contracts can mean very little(34:35) What 744 years of project time saved looks like(36:35) Why complex enterprise software is still difficult to build in-house

Working longer does not necessarily make founders feel worse. In fact, some of the founders putting in the most hours report feeling healthier than their peers.Itxaso del Palacio, General Partner at Notion Capital, explores this founder health paradox and why feeling capable of pushing harder may not be the same as performing sustainably.Using lessons from endurance sport and findings from Notion Capital’s Negative Split research, she explains why founders need to pace themselves for a journey that can last five, eight or ten years. She also looks at the role of intrinsic motivation, teams, coaches and peer networks in helping founders maintain performance over time.The talk ultimately challenges investors and board members to look beyond growth metrics and consider whether the people building the company have what they need to finish the race strongly.HighlightsWhy founders can learn from endurance athletesWhat the negative split reveals about sustainable performanceWhy long working hours can distort how healthy founders feelWhat startup culture misunderstands about recoveryWhy intrinsic motivation matters over the long termHow strong support networks help founders keep performingWhy boards should look beyond financial and operating metricsWhy the way a founder finishes matters more than how they startThis session was recorded at the Love Tomorrow Summit, where EUVC curated the investor-focused programme.Timestamps(00:00) Intro(01:20) What happens when founders have to keep going for years(03:00) Why elite athletes pace for the second half(04:35) Why investors treat founders like machines(05:30) What the Negative Split research found(06:40) The perception gap around founder health(08:05) What startup culture gets wrong about recovery(09:10) Intrinsic motivation and support networks(10:00) Why founder health is a business issue(10:40) What investors should ask in the boardroom(11:15) Why performance is about how you finish

Europe’s exposure to technologies and supply chains it does not control is becoming harder to ignore.In this episode of This Week in European Tech, Dan Bowyer, Mads Jensen of SuperSeed and Andrew J Scott of 7percent Ventures look at that problem from several angles. The discussion starts with US–China tensions over rare earths before turning to Europe’s own reliance on Chinese refining capacity and how difficult it would be to rebuild more of that industrial capability closer to home. They also examine the intensifying AI price war. OpenAI and Anthropic are making frontier intelligence cheaper, while open-source models are gaining ground. But lower prices do not necessarily make enterprises more independent: once models are integrated deeply into workflows, switching providers can carry its own technical, legal and operational costs. The conversation then moves to autonomous AI agents, what happens when they behave in unexpected ways and how Europe is beginning to define liability when AI-powered products cause harm. They close with signs of movement elsewhere in the European ecosystem, from semiconductor investment to pension capital entering venture. HighlightsWhat US–China rare-earth tensions reveal about Europe’s own dependenciesWhy refining capacity matters as much as access to raw materialsHow the AI price war is changing enterprise buying decisionsWhy cheaper models may still leave companies locked into providersHow open-source AI is gaining ground inside enterprisesWhat autonomous agents mean for security and accountabilityHow Europe is approaching AI product liabilityWhy recent semiconductor and pension-fund moves matter for European tech

AI in GTM is often framed as a productivity tool: write the email faster, automate the workflow or increase the volume of outreach. Harrison Rose, Co-Founder of Goodfit and Paddle, makes the case for a more fundamental shift.His argument is that AI becomes far more valuable when it moves from executing tasks to making decisions. Harrison traces that thinking back to Paddle, where classification models helped identify relevant software companies more quickly and accurately than a manual research process.He then looks at what today’s AI makes possible. By combining market data with past wins, losses, contract values and interactions, teams can begin to predict which accounts are worth pursuing and how to approach them.Harrison explains how expected value can inform those choices and why GTM systems may increasingly decide who gets targeted, when, through which channels and with what level of spend.This talk was recorded during the EUVC Summit & Awards Show 2026.HighlightsWhy scaling old GTM workflows misses the bigger AI opportunityWhy Harrison sees decision-making as AI’s core strengthWhat Paddle’s early use of classification models revealedHow AI can use more context than an individual repHow expected value can improve account prioritisationWhy GTM strategy could become increasingly dynamic and machine-ledWhat this shift could mean for the buyer experienceTimestamps(00:00) Intro(01:00) Why AI in GTM needs a different approach(02:15) The GTM problem Harrison faced at Paddle(03:25) Automating prospect research with classification models(05:00) What Paddle’s early use of AI revealed(06:10) Why automating bad GTM work does not make it better(08:05) Why decision-making is AI’s real strength(09:45) How AI can outperform traditional account mapping(11:10) Using expected value to prioritise accounts(12:50) Letting AI decide channels, spend and outreach(13:55) What programmatic advertising tells us about the future of GTM(14:35) The future of AI-led go-to-market

Uncertainty is uncomfortable, but Marc Thom, Head of Henkel Ventures, argues that it can also create the conditions for new businesses, technologies and growth.Marc describes resilience as a muscle: not simply surviving disruption, but learning how to turn challenges into commercial opportunities. He connects that idea to sustainability, resource dependency and demographic change, and explains why he believes material science can play a major role in reducing emissions and reshaping industries.He also explores how AI could accelerate innovation by helping companies and researchers work with vast amounts of knowledge and data, and why Europe may be better positioned than it often assumes. From established corporates and universities to scientific expertise, venture capital and entrepreneurial talent, Marc argues that many of the ingredients are already here.The bigger question is whether Europe can use those strengths with enough optimism, long-term thinking and willingness to act.HighlightsWhy resilience is about turning challenges into opportunitiesHow sustainability can become a source of growthWhy material science could have an outsized climate impactHow AI can support innovation in materials and formulationsWhy Europe may be more competitive than it thinksWhat startups can teach established companies about responding to uncertaintyWhy optimism only matters if it leads to actionThis session was recorded at the Love Tomorrow Summit, where EUVC curated the investor-focused programme.Timestamps(00:00) Intro(01:00) Why startups make Marc optimistic(02:00) Finding opportunity in uncertainty(03:55) Why resilience is a muscle(04:20) Sustainability and material science as growth opportunities(05:05) How AI could accelerate material innovation(06:05) Why Europe is more competitive than it thinks(06:35) How startups turn long-term trends into businesses(07:25) Turning challenges into opportunities

A CVC can stay active on paper while becoming increasingly irrelevant to the company that owns it.That was the situation Hans Söhngen stepped into at KPN Ventures. After years of early-stage investing, the fund lacked strong internal anchoring and had too little evidence of the value it was creating for KPN.In this conversation, Andreas Munk Holm and Jeppe Høier speak with Hans Söhngen, Managing Director at KPN Ventures, about how he helped turn the fund around. The new approach starts with a simple test: why does this investment make sense for KPN?Hans explains how that question reshaped the portfolio, the companies KPN Ventures backs and the way the team works with business units across KPN. He also reflects on what he would change about the legacy portfolio, why internal sponsors need to genuinely want a partnership and how strategic relevance can be tested through real commercial activity.The financial side still matters. Hans discusses how KPN Ventures looks for companies that can contribute strategically while remaining strong investments in their own right. Portfolio partnerships generated more than €20 million in revenue for KPN last year, and Hans says that figure could nearly double this year.HighlightsWhy KPN Ventures needed to rethink its original modelHow Hans rebuilt the fund around value for KPNThe logic every new investment needs to passWhat he learned from managing the legacy portfolioWhy commercial revenue is an important measure of strategic impactHow KPN balances strategic and financial returnsWhy internal sponsors need to pull opportunities into the businessWhat made KPN relevant to ElevenLabsWhy fewer, higher-impact partnerships can create more valueTimestamps(00:00) Intro(02:20) Why KPN Ventures was created(05:40) Where the original CVC model stopped working(09:20) Rebuilding the fund around value for KPN(12:15) The logic every new investment needs to pass(14:45) What Hans would change about the legacy portfolio(21:10) Building the new KPN Ventures strategy(24:50) How KPN measures strategic value(26:30) Why KPN invested in ElevenLabs(31:45) Balancing strategic value with financial returns(38:00) Moving faster and giving founders a clear answer(40:15) Why every deal needs an internal sponsor(41:50) Why KPN reduced innovation noise and focused on fewer deals

For climate hardware, technical performance is only the start. Commercial viability depends on risk-averse buyers trusting the product, industry recommenders backing it and manufacturers being able to reproduce it reliably at scale.Blue Frontier’s journey from pilot units to commercial deployments shows how much of that work happens outside the lab.More than 90,000 hours of field operation and the training of over 1,000 sales engineers have helped build confidence in the company’s cooling technology, while its manufacturing strategy relies on established partners rather than building its own gigafactory.In this EUVC episode, Blue Frontier Co-Founder and CEO Daniel Betts and Executive Chair Christian Hernandez Gallardo discuss what it takes to move beyond pilots, scale manufacturing and turn cooling into grid infrastructure.They also explore how energy storage changes the economics of air conditioning and whether Europe could leapfrog conventional cooling technology.HighlightsWhy HVAC sales partners and contractors shape adoptionHow field deployments turn performance into market trustWhy hardware companies risk “death by a thousand pilots”When engineering teams need to freeze a production versionHow outsourced manufacturing can reduce the capital needed to scaleWhy cooling and energy storage could free up grid capacityWhat Europe would need to leapfrog conventional coolingRecording note: This episode was recorded before the public announcement that Christian would step back from his role at 2150 to become Executive Chair of Blue Frontier. He remains an investor across the firm’s funds.Join us for Luxembourg Venture Days on October 14–15 at Luxexpo The Box. Explore the agenda and register here.Timestamps(00:00) Intro(02:35) What changes for Blue Frontier now(03:15) How Blue Frontier’s cooling technology works(05:05) Why cooling is a grid capacity problem(09:15) What building owners are actually buying(15:10) From science and engineering to sales and service(19:25) Winning trust in a risk-averse HVAC market(23:20) Moving from prototypes to scalable manufacturing(27:35) Why Blue Frontier does not need its own gigafactory(31:10) When hardware founders need to stop tinkering(32:17) Why air conditioning can be a venture-scale business(33:17) Scaling supply, financing and commercial growth(36:17) Can Europe leapfrog conventional cooling?

Europe’s venture ecosystem has grown, but how durable is the capital supporting it? Government and sovereign funding remain significant while European pension fund participation is still limited.In this episode, Dan Bowyer, Mads Jensen and Priyanka Savjani of SuperSeed examine what Europe’s reliance on public capital means for the long-term strength of its venture market.They also share their takeaways from the All-In Summit, discuss why Langdock reversed its Delaware structure, assess how higher rates could affect AI infrastructure spending and explore Europe’s role in physical AI and advanced manufacturing.HighlightsWhy public funding can leave European venture politically vulnerableWhat limited pension fund participation means for long-term capitalWhy Langdock moved its corporate structure back to EuropeWhether independent evaluation can address AI safety concernsHow rising rates could reshape the AI infrastructure boomOpenAI’s advertising opportunity and the economics of conversational AIEuropean technology’s role in physical AI and manufacturingThe companies and technologies worth watching this weekTimestamps(00:00) Cold open(01:13) Introduction(02:39) Inside the All-In Summit(15:00) Closer ties between Canada and the EU(17:59) Why LangDock moved its corporate structure to Europe(20:38) Who funds European venture?(23:44) AI safety: Slow down or audit the models?(35:53) How higher rates could affect AI infrastructure spending(42:45) OpenAI’s advertising and monetisation opportunity(46:39) European IPOs and the OpenAI–Anthropic model race(49:41) Physical AI, humanoid robots and industrial software(55:37) Deals and companies of the week(58:48) The week ahead

What changes when an investor encounters a founder who expands their sense of what is possible?Krishna Visvanathan, Co-Founder and Partner at Crane Venture Partners, reflects on meeting James Dacombe in 2019. At 19, James was proposing a non-invasive brain sensor inspired by the experiences of two grandparents with dementia. Krishna could not yet know whether the technology behind CoMind would work, but he believed James had the qualities to build more than one consequential company.Crane backed that potential. Several years later, the firm became the only institutional investor in the first round of James’s second company, now OLIX.In this conversation, recorded during the EUVC Summit & Awards Show in April 2026, Krishna shares how working with James sharpened Crane’s approach to identifying outlier founders. He explains why the firm considers whether every investment could return half or all of a fund and why a founder’s humility, self-awareness and capacity to learn can matter as much as the initial idea.The discussion also explores how exceptional founders attract people with deeper specialist expertise, why Crane continues to increase its appetite for ambitious technical bets and what investors should search for when the next outlier will not resemble the last one.HighlightsWhy Krishna backed James before he could assess whether CoMind’s technology was achievableHow James changed Crane’s expectations of founders and potential outcomesWhy Crane underwrites investments for fund-returning potentialThe qualities that suggest a founder can keep learning and developingWhy searching for another version of a past success can obscure the next outlierHow founders without conventional credentials can assemble world-class technical teamsWhat gave Crane the conviction to back James’s second companyTimestamps(00:00) Intro(01:29) Meeting James Dacombe and backing CoMind(04:05) Betting on the founder before the product(05:42) How James raised Crane’s investment bar(07:23) Why Crane refuses to hedge(08:55) What another outlier founder looks like(10:03) Humility, self-awareness and maturity(11:46) The founder at the back of the room

Europe can invest heavily in AI, but without enough cheap, reliable electricity, its ambitions will eventually hit a physical limit. Data centres, industry and digital infrastructure all need power, making Europe’s energy system an increasingly important part of its technology strategy. Alex Bakir, General Partner at Norrsken Evolve, argues that electricity is becoming a question of competitiveness, resilience and sovereignty, not only climate. Alex traces how Europe became dependent on imported energy and why electrification now requires changes to grids, costs and supply chains. He also explains why Europe may already have the technology and capital it needs, if it can overcome fragmentation and build enough momentum to act. HighlightsWhy Europe’s AI ambitions depend on electricityHow energy became a competitiveness and sovereignty issueWhy grid infrastructure is becoming a bottleneckThe risk of swapping one dependency for anotherWhy Alex believes Europe already has the technology and capital to actThis session was recorded at the Love Tomorrow Summit, where EUVC curated the investor-focused programme.Timestamps(01:00) Why Europe should run on cheap, clean electricity(02:00) How Europe’s postwar model shaped its energy system(03:00) From industrial power to dependence on imported energy(04:00) Why this is bigger than climate change(05:00) Energy, geopolitics and economic power(06:00) Europe’s vulnerability to energy price shocks(07:00) Why AI raises the stakes for Europe’s electricity system(08:00) Grid bottlenecks, high costs and new dependencies(09:00) Why Europe already has the technology and capital to act(10:00) The case for a more electrified Europe